V-22 (Ospreys) headed to Iraq

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1817718/posts

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Let's see if the pilots make up for the aircraft, then...

[The Avon Lady]

Aren't these designed to shatter to pieces over the heads of enemy forces? :hmm:

[Ishmael]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Aren't these designed to shatter to pieces over the heads of enemy forces? :hmm:

You are correct, my good woman. It's a capability that was inherent when the design was first introduced in the late 1970's and 30 years of throwing money at the problem has only enhanced it. All that & it's less maneuverable than a helo so it'll be a slower, easier target for insurgent fire. I pray for every poor slob who has to ride in one of those flying merde boxes.

[NefariousKoel]

We should build more of these so as to crash into the enemy with.

[bookworm_020]

Isn't the first field mod a Bullseye on the side of the aircraft??? I bet there will plenty of grunts that will prefer to walk!

[TteFAboB]

There's a really good side to this if things work out alright. Civvie use! It's a little more expensive than both a Cessna and a Robinson combined, but we can try cheapening it.

Let's see...

Do we need landing gears? Three of them?! Redundant. Loose 2. Keep one non-retractable landing skid.

Next, the engines. The small Cessnas have only one engine. The Robinson has only one engine. Who needs two engines?! Who the hell put two engines on this thing?! Were they trying to make it more difficult for us to afford it?! What were they thinking?! Our version will have only one engine and the luxury version will have a prop with 3 blades because it's too difficult to make 2 symmetrical ones in photoshop.

Talk about redundancy. If we only have one engine now, we don't need two rudders. Out with one of them, and since our new center of gravity doesn't leave much airflow to it we can cut it in half aswell.

We can't afford Windows and we can't bother to learn how to use Linux so no computers for us.

The Refueling boom is irrelevant. There are no civvie tankers flying up there. It will be replaced by a machine-gun because that we can afford. The luxury model will have the A-10 cannon in its place.

Space. It's great to be able to carry marines all around. But we must cut the cost of the monster. There's too much metal on this thing. So let's leave only the minimum amount of space necessary. That leaves the cockpit and the hump behind it with enough space to hold the A-10 cannon on the luxury version.

Ladies and Gentleman, behold the Pandion haliaetus luxury, also known as the civilian version of the Osprey, better and cheaper than Bell's own model, even after all the law suits:

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/1...wospreydn5.jpg

Nope, we can't load that cannon with ammo. But this bird now looks alot meaner than your puny Cessnas. It will eat them for breakfast.

[geetrue]

I wish I was a Marine General ... then I could tell them to test it as an unmaned radio controled aircraft over Bagdad first ... if it survives, great.

Fill her up and take off, but if it doesn't survive ... why waste another precious soul.

I think the V-22 was designed for carrier duty to ferry the Marines ashore in a hurry for a fire fight and to pick them up for the same reason.

Lord be with them ...

[ASWnut101]

Originally Posted by TteFAboB

There's a really good side to this if things work out alright. Civvie use! It's a little more expensive than both a Cessna and a Robinson combined, but we can try cheapening it.

Let's see...

Do we need landing gears? Three of them?! Redundant. Loose 2. Keep one non-retractable landing skid.

Next, the engines. The small Cessnas have only one engine. The Robinson has only one engine. Who needs two engines?! Who the hell put two engines on this thing?! Were they trying to make it more difficult for us to afford it?! What were they thinking?! Our version will have only one engine and the luxury version will have a prop with 3 blades because it's too difficult to make 2 symmetrical ones in photoshop.

Talk about redundancy. If we only have one engine now, we don't need two rudders. Out with one of them, and since our new center of gravity doesn't leave much airflow to it we can cut it in half aswell.

We can't afford Windows and we can't bother to learn how to use Linux so no computers for us.

The Refueling boom is irrelevant. There are no civvie tankers flying up there. It will be replaced by a machine-gun because that we can afford. The luxury model will have the A-10 cannon in its place.

Space. It's great to be able to carry marines all around. But we must cut the cost of the monster. There's too much metal on this thing. So let's leave only the minimum amount of space necessary. That leaves the cockpit and the hump behind it with enough space to hold the A-10 cannon on the luxury version.

Ladies and Gentleman, behold the Pandion haliaetus luxury, also known as the civilian version of the Osprey, better and cheaper than Bell's own model, even after all the law suits:

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/1...wospreydn5.jpg

Nope, we can't load that cannon with ammo. But this bird now looks alot meaner than your puny Cessnas. It will eat them for breakfast.

You expect that thing to fly? Good luck getting it off the ground without a tail jet/rotor. :rotfl: :rotfl:

[TteFAboB]

This thing is alot bigger than it looks: